U.S. v. SMITH, 12-7003. (2012)
Court: Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
Number: infco20121107113
Visitors: 13
Filed: Nov. 07, 2012
Latest Update: Nov. 07, 2012
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Llewellen Fernando Smith appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c) (2006) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Smith, No. 3:96-cr-00066-REP-20 (E.D. Va. May 25, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in th
Summary: Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. PER CURIAM: Llewellen Fernando Smith appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. 3582(c) (2006) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Smith, No. 3:96-cr-00066-REP-20 (E.D. Va. May 25, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the..
More
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
PER CURIAM:
Llewellen Fernando Smith appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c) (2006) motion. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Smith, No. 3:96-cr-00066-REP-20 (E.D. Va. May 25, 2012). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED.
Source: Leagle
